California 2021-2022 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB2254

Introduced
2/16/22  
Refer
3/24/22  
Report Pass
3/24/22  
Refer
3/28/22  
Report Pass
4/19/22  
Refer
4/19/22  
Refer
5/4/22  
Report Pass
5/19/22  
Engrossed
5/23/22  
Refer
5/24/22  
Refer
6/1/22  
Report Pass
6/29/22  
Refer
6/29/22  
Refer
8/2/22  
Report Pass
8/11/22  
Enrolled
8/23/22  
Chaptered
9/13/22  

Caption

State highways: Route 107: relinquishment.

Impact

If enacted, AB 2254 will result in the portion of Route 107 within Redondo Beach's limits being designated as local rather than state highway. This change could potentially improve local traffic flow and management, obliging the city to ensure that traffic signals and other infrastructure are efficiently maintained. In addition, the relinquished section will no longer be considered for future state adoption into the highway system. As such, it marks a shift toward local governance in transportation management, which may allow for more tailored responses to the city's unique traffic patterns and needs.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 2254, authored by Muratsuchi, focuses on the relinquishment of a segment of State Route 107 to the City of Redondo Beach. The bill modifies existing laws pertaining to state control over highways by allowing the California Transportation Commission to transfer authority of this highway section to a local government. The intent is to empower Redondo Beach with greater control over local traffic and infrastructure, which can enhance the city's ability to manage transportation in alignment with local needs.

Sentiment

The legislative sentiment around AB 2254 appears to be generally favorable, with ample support indicating a recognition of the importance of local control over transportation issues. Local officials and residents likely view the transfer positively, as it represents an opportunity to address specific traffic challenges that a city might face. However, there are concerns that state relinquishment could lead to local neglect of important infrastructure, prompting discussions about the balance of responsibility and resource allocation between state and local governments.

Contestion

Notably, the bill could face contention regarding its implications for state versus local governance. Critics may argue that transferring control over a state highway to local authorities could lead to inconsistencies in road maintenance and safety standards, particularly if the city lacks adequate resources or expertise in highway management. This potential conflict underscores broader debates about the roles of state and local governments in managing public infrastructure, with each side advocating for their preferred level of control and the implications of such governance.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA AB2817

State highways: Route 1: relinquishment.

CA AB250

State highways: State Route 83: reduction.

CA SB606

State highways: State Route 203: reduction.

CA AB2082

State highways: State Route 138: reduction.

CA SB710

Sale of excess state highway property: State Highway Route 710 Terminus.

CA SB1247

Route 41: Tachi Highway.

CA AB98

Planning and zoning: logistics use: truck routes.

CA AB2333

State highways: airspace leases: report.

CA AB732

Crimes: relinquishment of firearms.

CA AB752

State highways: worker safety.

Similar Bills

CA AB250

State highways: State Route 83: reduction.

CA SB606

State highways: State Route 203: reduction.

CA AB744

State highways: State Route 83: reduction.

CA AB2817

State highways: Route 1: relinquishment.

CA SB921

State highways: Route 174: relinquishment.

CA AB2172

State highways: Route 133: relinquishment.

CA SB504

State highways: Route 1: relinquishment.

CA AB2473

State Highway Route 185: relinquishment: City of San Leandro.